Cannabis News Stop the Drug War!
  The DEA in Chains: Bound by a Patient in a Chair
Posted by CN Staff on September 07, 2002 at 21:44:03 PT
By Daniel Forbes - Special To 

medical The Drug Enforcement Administration believes in starting at the top. By shutting down two of the most aboveboard and righteous of California's medical marijuana operations, the feds can perhaps instill such fear that they free themselves from chasing the shaky and the small-fry. Last October they shuttered the Los Angeles Cannabis Resource Center, so respected that the city of West Hollywood co-signed its mortgage and so open that it allowed Congress's General Accounting Office in for a look.

And yesterday, some two dozen DEA agents descended, chainsaws in hand, upon the medical marijuana cooperative, the Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana (WAMM), located near Davenport, some sixty miles south of San Francisco. California NORML director Dale Gieringer said, "The DEA is making a statement by going after the gold standard of dispensaries."

As the agents went about destroying some 130 plants up in the middle of nowhere in the San Lorenzo mountains, twenty or more WAMM members - none of whom pay for their medicine - barricaded the sole route off the property, a narrow mountain road.

First they blocked the road with a truck. Abandoning that strategy, they retreated a bit further to make their stand at a gate to the property, a heavy chain soon padlocked around the gate. Not that the woman in a wheelchair or the stout one with a cane could have physically overmastered the agents, should it have mano a mano come to that. But WAMM also called in the media, and soon several TV news cameras and print reporters stood by hoping for a confrontation.

WAMM board member Heather Edney was one of the protesters. Noting the press, she said, "I don't think the DEA wanted to have to shove a patient in front of the TV cameras." It's elemental, whether facing Bull Conner's Birmingham fire hoses or the DEA's shiny new SUVs: at some point desperate people who can't stomach it any longer prepare to put their bodies on the line.

Ready to leave, the DEA was now locked in. They had packed up the pot in their rental trucks and, charges Edney, seized some patient lists. But those pesky TV cameras remained focused on pathetic people in wheelchairs who didn't have enough sense to accept their lot and go on home. The protestors yelling louder, some agents perhaps feeling foolish, the DEA did what any good citizen needing help does: they called the cops.

Mark Tracy, the sheriff and coroner of Santa Cruz County, said that the DEA contacted his office for assistance with the individuals blocking the access road.

Special Agent Richard Meyer, spokesperson for the DEA San Francisco field division, said, "There was some sort of civil disturbance, and the Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Office came and assisted."

But Tracy, a committed WAMM supporter, wasn't going to have his men clear an escape route for the DEA. So there matters lay for a tense hour or so until WAMM's founder and director, Valerie Corrals, started talking tough.

And why shouldn't she, considering the start to her day: men in helmets pointing rifles at her and then handcuffing her still in the pajamas that - marked woman that she is - she had foolishly thought to wear to bed.

WAMM board member and a guest in the house, Suzanne Pfeil, described the raid to a tele-press conference. She said she awoke sometime after 7:00 a.m. to find five agents in her bedroom pointing rifles at her. They told her to get out of bed; she told them as a polio patient and paraplegic she could not. Finally she scrambled up on her crutches, her wheelchair being elsewhere, and was handcuffed.

DEA spokesperson Meyer confirmed that, following the protocol for any drug raid, the agents wore "ballistic helmets" and - pointing out that DEA agents have died in the line of duty - he stated that they carried weapons sufficient to provide the necessary protection. He would not disclose the type of weapon or number of agents involved.

The gate locked and the feds bottled up, Ms. Corral and her husband, Michael, WAMM's horticultural wizard, were by this point up in San Jose for processing. She relates the tale as follows: Two agents asked me to tell our members to disperse. I said no. They asked me to ask them to let the DEA pass. I again refused. And then they offered to take us back. At one point, Michael asked them if it was a hostage exchange. It was a negotiation to some extent. Yes, I would describe it as a quid-pro-quo.

Cell phone service blissfully unavailable, there was a scramble to devise a means for Corral to deliver her dispensation, to call off the rabid cancer and AIDS patients. Apparently the Santa Cruz sheriff's department produced a satellite phone, and the ragged band was told to stand down.

At that, still in those PJs of hers, Valerie and Michael were driven to Santa Cruz and given $40 for a cab home, the agents involved not wanting to risk getting caught up on that dangerous mountain. True to the parsimonious ways that have enabled them to serve so many so cheaply for so long, the Corrals called a friend instead. Ms. Corral said, "I consider that money a down-payment on what they owe us."

Sheriff Tracy told me the DEA gave his office no prior notice of the raid.

Special Agent Meyer insisted that the DEA "coordinated with local authorities." He refused to specify how or with whom.

Meanwhile, having been arrested on possession with intent to distribute and conspiracy charges, the Corrals face the same sort of legal limbo the Los Angeles club's Scott Imler has labored under for close to a year. Ambiguously released, the Corrals could face charges at any point over the next five years solely on the evidence gathered yesterday.

But no charges were filed yesterday. The U.S. Attorney's office in San Francisco would only say, "No charges have been filed." With no charges as of yet, is hauling off hundreds of patients' medicine tantamount to simple theft? A source in the U.S. attorney's office added, "When no charges are made with the arrest - there's no complaint or indictment - the investigation is on-going. You can always investigate further."

Citing anonymous sources, the Oakland Tribune said today that, "federal prosecutors had declined to charge them, forcing the [DEA] to let them go." Is it possible the DEA didn't inform their Justice Dept. colleagues of the raid?

It remains to be seen how much more there is to investigate in what, after all, is a relatively small bust by federal standards. At some 130 plants, the number barely exceeds what has been the feds' typical practice of turning most cases of 100 or fewer plants over to local law enforcement. (In what by all accounts is a beautiful, high-yield garden of more than an acre, some plants were seven-feet tall.)

The DEA acted on a tip from " 'confidential sources' " it told the Oakland Tribune. Given the positive publicity WAMM has received, including a recent feature in Mother Jones, the agency's hot tip is akin to confidential information on the occupant of Grant's tomb.

So the Corrals will endure a stretch of legal limbo, an uncertainty that just might be cut short by Ms. Corral's refusal to slink quietly away. She told me, "We can't undue the harm they create in the world - the great harm and physical suffering - but we'll change the law if we have to beat down their flipping doors. "

Given WAMM's reputation and local and statewide support, it remains to be seen if that federal law, the Controlled Substances Act, will actually be applied to the Corrals. (They were the only two arrested; Suzanne Pfeil and a couple of other house guests were not.) How eager is the government for a contentious, high-profile trial of altruistic people who give their pot away?

And since WAMM is a cooperative, a horticultural collective, might the feds be on shaky legal ground busting a group of patients? The May, 2001 Supreme Court ruling against the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Club outlawed distribution but did not address personal cultivation. Close to 300 sick and dying WAMM members who are physically capable get their hands dirty in the garden, with some of the rest sleeping over in a trailer to guard the crop. So, does that constitute distribution? Or is it personal-use cultivation by people with doctors' notes who are legal under California state law?

Sheriff Tracy asserted that WAMM always operated on the right side of state law as far as he was concerned. His office maintains "very professional relations with WAMM. At all times they have tried to run their operation in a professional manner."

Would a trial emphasizing the Bush administration's overarching intransigence prove worth it for, should the government succeed, very short sentences? Since the Corrals have good records, sterling references and there was no hint of violence or drug-kingpin profits, they would face perhaps less than a year should the sentencing guideline complexities shake out in their favor, said a law enforcement source. This individual added that the feds don't typically even send people to prison for less than a year, preferring some sort of halfway house or home detention in those cases.

Bill Panzer, a prominent Oakland-based, medical-use defense attorney, figured that the Corrals - despite ostensible federal mandatory minimum guidelines - might actually end up doing no more than several months time, followed by some months "wearing a bracelet." And Panzer wondered "whether the government would want some big show trial where it just ends up looking horrible?"

Of course, should the Corrals persist in trying to relieve pain and suffering, as may well prove the case, all bets are off. And insist they probably will, stubborn souls that they are. Ms. Corral said, "We're a collective, we'll continue." Half her members are able to donate to the cause, and half cannot.

By some lights, it's hard to see how she can do anything but, given her assertion that, "We work to keep 35-year-olds out of nursing homes. We wipe their asses for them. We take shifts sitting up with them."

WAMM seems a genuinely different sort of place. Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, noted that WAMM was the first medical marijuana dispensary to achieve non-profit status. Raiding it is particularly shameful, he said, since it's the dispensary most true to the "hospice" model. Saying there were "no shenanigans, no profit," he added that 85% of the club's patients are terminally ill.

The last refuge for miles around for the very sick; there's a long waiting list for admission to the cooperative, typically possible only when a current member dies. Unfortunately that happens all too frequently. Ms. Corral said five friends - five WAMM members - have died in the last two weeks. As Panzer put it, "There are no 23-year-old skateboarders going in there claiming their knee hurts."

In 1999, Ms. Corral served on California Attorney General Bill Lockyer's panel on medical marijuana. And, according to the Oakland Tribune, she and Michael "helped write" Prop 215. Panzer, who may get involved in WAMM's defense, said, "There's no one in the medical marijuana movement I have more respect for. I've never heard a bad word about them." He referred to the group admiringly as a "hippie collective."

WAMM enjoys a few gorgeous, sylvan acres, the Pacific just visible in the distance. There's a couple of ramshackle houses with a shifting roster of occupants. Allen St Pierre, executive director of the NORML Foundation, referred to WAMM as the "socialists in the woods." Dale Gieringer said, "Theirs is a living counter-culture. They're living the old '60s dream on the fringes of the cash economy."

Following the DEA evisceration, WAMM received widespread support. Americans for Safe Access claimed there would be protests today at various federal buildings in Oakland and San Francisco, Sacramento, San Jose, Santa Rosa, Madison, Wisconsin, New York, Chicago, Austin and Washington, D.C. It says it participated in general protests at 54 DEA offices this past June.

Santa Cruz County Supervisor Mardi Wormhoudt said that WAMM operated totally within the law and declared herself "absolutely appalled" that, so close to September 11th, the federal government is spreading "sorrow and fear. It's not reassuring that federal agents are running around the mountains in Santa Cruz County interrupting WAMM's important work."

Nadelmann noted that 65% - to - 70% of the public favor the use of medical marijuana. Despite that sentiment, Nadelmann declared the Bush administration chock-a-block with the "fanatical, inhumane and the temperance-minded. They're like the old alcohol temperance warriors who cared not a bit for the harm prohibition causes."

Probably coincidentally, the raid came a day after a Canadian Parliament committee called for marijuana legalization. The exhaustive 600-page report, issued by the Canadian Senate's Committee on Illegal Drugs, called for regulating marijuana like alcohol. Among many other provisions, it found no evidence for the discounted theory that pot is a 'gateway' drug leading to harder drug use, according to its chairman, Pierre Nolin. It's a theory promulgated continually by U.S. federal authorities, most recently by Drug Czar John Walters.

Apparently though, a press-conscience DEA is fond of coincidence. In a particularly pointed jab, it chose February 12th - the same day DEA Director Asa Hutchinson addressed a jeering crowd at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco - to raid San Francisco's Sixth Street Harm Reduction Center. Oddly enough, in that speech Hutchinson declared that the DEA would not go after patients; WAMM, of course, is nothing but the very sickest of patients. Their medicine hauled away, Pfeil said, "Patients are going to be forced to take more pharmaceutical drugs, which is maybe what the government wants."

In the absence of public support, it's hard to fathom the Feds' true aim, with now four widely protested raids on California dispensaries since October, 2001. Gieringer asserts he has heard from several sources both within the medical marijuana community and within law enforcement, "that the Justice Department has ordered a crackdown on California's medical cannabis clubs." The Feds having now decimated the two most high-profile, tight and correct operations outside San Francisco, the question arises as to how many more big-news busts they even need before the majority of dispensaries give up the ghost.

Speaking more broadly and referring to the use of automatic weapons to raid a "hospice," Nadelmann said such actions indicate a worrisome rogue mindset as the White House and Congress define the limits of sensible homeland security.

Bitter at the loss of so much medicine, Ms. Corral said, "People should wonder how they're going to be safe in their homes with this happening. But with a court-appointed president, this is what you get."

Street dealers, of course, rejoice at the imposition of federal law. A WAMM member named Hal told me it cost WAMM 94-cents to grow a gram of organic medicine; he estimated the street cost at $15.00 a gram. Another, more self-reliant route beckons, though one that does the terminally ill little good. Pointing to that 2001 Supreme Court ruling outlawing distribution but not personal cultivation, St. Pierre said, "It's a good time to be a local grow-equipment entrepreneur. Two years from now there's going to be a profusion of equipment sellers."

Whatever happens, doubtless there'll also be a profusion of special agents - folks the drug war enables to retire early with a pension and health care for the rest of their days - ready with their boots shined and their "ballistic helmets" polished.

The Corrals face prison - maybe. And some patients face a hastened death because men with guns, men working for every voter in this country, stole the cannabis that some use to control their vomiting so they can keep other medicine in their stomachs long enough to make it into their bloodstream. It's that simple.

Daniel Forbes -- -- writes on social policy. His recent report on state and federal political malfeasance geared to defeat treatment rather than incarceration ballot initiatives was published by the Institute for Policy Studies. Much of his work, including his series in Salon that led to his testimony before both the Senate and the House, is archived at:

Complete Title: The DEA in Chains: Bound by a Patient in a Chair, the Feds Call Local Cops for Help

Author: Daniel Forbes - Special to
Published: September 6, 2002
Copyright: 2002 Kalyx com

Related Articles & Web Sites:




Americans For Safe Access

No Charges After DEA Anti-Pot Raids

Pot Bust Draws Statewide Protests

No Charges After DEA Anti-Pot Raids

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help

Comment #30 posted by Morgan on September 10, 2002 at 07:48:19 PT
Yes and No :-P
Your question is ...whether or not the Nevada initiative ,Question 9,,will be approved by the voters of Nevada! not... in this brave new world order...a yes or no question.

You could have asked back in 2000 whether or not the voters will elect Gore as president.

Yes, they did.

...and no, he didn't become president.

So, from this angle...Yes, the voters will pass this in Nevada...and no, it won't go through... due to voter purges, lost ballots, legal loopholes, terrorist (DEA, CIA) planes flying into the New York, New York Casino resulting in martial law making the election invalid..., etc. (Again, I'm joking...sort of.)

It's a strange world we live in... and some of us are just as paranoid as you, dddd.

So, to be exact and pure on your question...Yes...the VOTERS will pass it...but, no, it won't pass.

Then things should get interesting.

[ Post Comment ]

Comment #29 posted by dddd on September 10, 2002 at 04:36:36 PT
,,thanx Morgan...
..I will count that as a Yes....(?)...[[nope?]]]]
..I am not sure what is meant by "election officials suppressing it".?...Are we talking about the Nevada election officials attempting to minimize the news of the voters passing the measure?,,or are we talking about politicial entities attempting to negate the will of the voters after the measure has passed?

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #28 posted by Morgan on September 09, 2002 at 08:08:17 PT
dddd, I agree with john wayne, the people will pass it and the corp-government will suppress it, ala Florida in 2000.

They'll 'clean' the voting records of all 'criminals', (i.e., anyone with a record, or anyone whose name sounds like anyone with a record.) Plus anyone who could have been convicted of a federal law. That's anybody who has had any dealings with gambling or prostitution. That's pretty much everyone in Nevada...except a few Mormans.

Hell, they just might cancel the whole thing because there isn't anybody in Nevada qualified to vote.

I'm only half joking.

[ Post Comment ]

Comment #27 posted by dddd on September 08, 2002 at 23:19:52 PT could go either way...
..but it cant hurt to make a prediction.....but.....I'm the one who will be donating ten bucks for each correct prediction!...there's no need for anyone to sit on the fence,,unless that's where they are most comfortable.....dddd

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #26 posted by BGreen on September 08, 2002 at 23:11:47 PT
I'm not kidding about my comment
just about the fence sitting. If I could predict the election I'd play the lottery and invest in the stock market.

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #25 posted by BGreen on September 08, 2002 at 23:10:09 PT
I'm just kidding
I think all of the cannabis users who can't risk saying anything positive in public will say yes in the privacy of the voting booth.

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #24 posted by FoM on September 08, 2002 at 23:05:48 PT
Very true indeed! I guess I just don't have a strong feeling at this point either way. Ask me about a week before elections and I'll have a yes or no then for sure.

[ Post Comment ]

Comment #23 posted by BGreen on September 08, 2002 at 22:59:33 PT
The problem with sitting on the fence
is you get splinters in your butt.

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #22 posted by FoM on September 08, 2002 at 22:52:01 PT
I know one thing for sure. You know what it is?

It will pass or it won't pass. I'm pretty sure of that. Is that an ok answer?

PS: Wouldn't I be a good politican? Just kidding. Don't want to be one.

[ Post Comment ]

Comment #21 posted by dddd on September 08, 2002 at 22:47:26 PT
....So Far...
..that's 7 Yes...and 3 No...(including my own yes and no)....C'mon,,let's have some more predictions!.. It cant hurt to post a Yes or No.....There's gotta be some more pessimists out there!......dddd

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #20 posted by john wayne on September 08, 2002 at 15:01:42 PT
The people will pass it
but the election officials will suppress it.

Hey, the corpo-gov staked out the territory in 2000, no?

They got tired of watching pro-pot initiatives pass, despite the clear instructions from the corpo-gov telling the people not to pass those initiatives.

After Shrub-Hiney 2000, they're rubbing their hands saying "we won't have THAT problem again."

[ Post Comment ]

Comment #19 posted by knox42897 on September 08, 2002 at 14:28:43 PT:

donating my time
Hey dddd, I am far from well to do myself. While I may not donate 10 dollars for every correct response. I will donate my time to the NRLE, if anyone else would like to join me, by all means email me for info.

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #18 posted by freedom fighter on September 08, 2002 at 13:29:51 PT
I think
no, I mean I believe it will pass by wide margin.


PS) Very well written article from Mr. Forbes!

[ Post Comment ]

Comment #17 posted by Robbie on September 08, 2002 at 10:00:05 PT
Question 9 will not pass
Hey, I need the money :-)

Plus...I've been looking at drug policy, and DP reform for many years now, and I seriously doubt that TPTB will let it pass.

Call me cynical. I am.

[ Post Comment ]

Comment #16 posted by FoM on September 08, 2002 at 09:12:26 PT
Now that my emails are not causing me problems I am slowly subscribing to newsgroups. I can't seem to find one though that talks about marijuana exclusively or close to exclusively. Is there a news group that stays on marijuana issues more then drug policy issues? I can handle a few more newsgroups and will unsubscribe to those that aren't of real interest to me right now. Thanks in advance! I really am not up on newsgroups at all.

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #15 posted by kaptinemo on September 08, 2002 at 08:53:43 PT:

Some one tell Mr. Forbes he can put the hammer
down, the nails have expired from super-migraines. He's illustrated all the crucial points.

The Feds' most major Achille's Heel is adverse publicity. Whether it be shoving a patient on live TV or a trial broadcast on COURT TV, they know that the moment the 'effect' (shoved patient) is derived from the cause (cannabis prohibition) or learn of the origin and purpose of prohibition during a trial, the game is over. Because the inevitable question has to be asked: Who's the 'terrorist' here? Osama bin Laden? Or the US government...against it's own people?

(In an aside: If the DEA insists on a desire to dress like Darth Vader, maybe we should start dressing like Rebel Alliance Infantry, Hoth Campaign?)

The moment that the Defense brings up historical records of how Anslinger wanted to keep 'ginger colored niggers' (His words, folks, not mine, so don't get out the acetyline torches) and other minorities in line purely for reasons of social control rather than public health, is the moment that prohibition dies in this country. I can't imagine any African-American, Hispanic or Asian American on the jury not being moved by pure disgust to not perform a jury nullification. Once one of the most in-plain-sight secrets of American politics becomes common knowledge, it'll be all over save for the shouting.

(Assuming we have not fallen so far civil-liberties wise that we see people being stopped on the street by black masked cops cradling machine-pistols and demanding to see your IDentichip implant scar.)

Which is why the DEA - such fearless, bold, heavily armed public servants - sat in their SUV's waiting for the local LEO's to do the 'dirty work' of moving wheelchair-bound patients out of the lane. You can bet they had strict orders to avoid just touching a patient at all costs, up to and including immediate dismissal for failing to follow that one order. The patients did the right thing by stopping the Agents on their way out. It made them sweat. It made them think. And most of all, it made them afraid. This may be the only way that the Gandhian way of satyagraha has any chance with these militarized Mayberry types.

I sincerely hope that the remaining clubs that have also played by the rules have instituted some sort of communications system to alert the local media about attacks ttaking place as they happen. A speed-dial feature on cell phones, to be used only for just an event, could be setup, and media types notified within minutes as to who is being raided. The sooner that a confrontation takes place with a DEA Agent and an ill person, the sooner the inevitable showdown in a courtroom will take place. The DEA knows that.

They fear that. Hence, their 'bulldog mouth' approach to busting into clubs...and their 'puppydog arse' component which leads them to sit in their armored SUV, shivering with weak bladders at the prospect of losing their jobs because they were rough with a 'sickie', and wait for real police to show up.

To move a woman in a wheelchair.

Real brave buncha guys, no?

[ Post Comment ]

Comment #14 posted by CongressmanSuet on September 08, 2002 at 08:17:16 PT:

Lets not forget what we are dealing with here...
Polls in NV have this thing neck and neck. If the warmongerernazinarcowarriors who are currently "in charge" of what used to be the greatest country in the world could muster all thier corporate influence and STEAL a Presidential election[no, I WONT GET OVER IT] a public referendom fixing should be a piece of cake. I know we gotta stay optimistic, but these feral cretins are busting people in wheelchairs! I hate to predict it will lose by the narrowest of margins, but that is my gut instinct. There is simply too much money in forfieture[sp] and caging naturally peaceful people. The sheeple on the street are so self absorbed, they dont care whats going on, it doesnt effect them personally.

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #13 posted by John Tyler on September 08, 2002 at 07:48:56 PT
Politicians in the wind
Politicians try to go with which ever way the political wind is blowing. Once they detect some momentum they will start to get on board or soon be out of office. With the stink caused by the DEA raids in California, they may want to go legal also.

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #12 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on September 08, 2002 at 07:02:32 PT
This too shall pass
I hope with every fiber of my being that it will pass. However, if it doesn't pass, Map will need that money even more... so it's a tough call.

I recently read "Repealing National Prohibition" about the Alcohol Prohibition era. The good news is, once the movement gained enough momentum for the politicians to notice, repeal was sped through faster than anyone expected. The turning point came in the 1932 elections, when the presidential candidates could no longer avoid taking a stand on the issue. Hoover came out as "dry" (prohibitionist) and (after much stalling and waffling) Roosevelt came out in favor of repeal. Roosevelt was elected by a landslide, and was considered to have a mandate - one he may not have personally agreed with but he had to do it because it's what got him elected. When he mentioned repeal in his speech to the convention, the applause lasted over 20 minutes. I think any presidential candidate who would endorse repeal of the drug war would recieve a similar response - if they had the balls to do it. Until then, I'm voting Libertarian, Green, or anything else besides the big two corporate-owned iron-fist gestapo-tactic-using narco-hypocrites.

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #11 posted by John Tyler on September 08, 2002 at 06:37:58 PT
This thing must pass
I think it will pass.

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #10 posted by dddd on September 08, 2002 at 02:31:45 PT
..thank you...knox42897 & BGreen
..yes BGreen,,I know it was sorta spooky and daring to do this,,but I think it's interesting,,relevant,,and for a good cause!.....I WILL send in ten dollars for each correct prediction!..........
and,,come to think of it,,why dont some people think about joining me?...I am far from being well to do...I can barely afford to pay attention!..I might have to take another guitar to the pawn shop if the response is vigorous enough!......
..Step up to the plate! costs alot of money to battle the big empire money that we are forced to allow them to steel from our paychecks.!! could even pick your own reform organization to donate to,,like NORML,NRLE,Cnews,,???....dddd

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #9 posted by BGreen on September 08, 2002 at 02:09:29 PT
I think it'll pass
but I didn't want to say anything. It seems as if we get in trouble for our late night writings. Being that I AM old music, I can't help it if that's what I talk about, but I don't want people to get mad and leave.

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #8 posted by knox42897 on September 08, 2002 at 01:59:44 PT:

Question 9
Question 9 will pass. I live in Nevada. I think this will will pass with 60%of the vote. Las Vegas Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement in the United States of America

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #7 posted by pppp on September 08, 2002 at 01:52:52 PT
..this is not a "joke"...
..either way,,looks like I,myself am out ten bucks...but.I am serious about this....Yes,,it will pass, ,,or NO,it will not pass.........ya got nothing to lose,,,I will donate ten bucks for every correct prediction!..just post a yes or no..... dont worry,,I am just counting the yes or no,,,,not 'who was right or wrong....I wont be trying to humiliate or bellittle anyone later with a "ha-ha,,you were wrong..",or something....just say Yes,,,or,,,No..

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #6 posted by bbbb on September 08, 2002 at 00:32:43 PT
..that's one YES,,,and one NO....

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #5 posted by qqqq on September 08, 2002 at 00:31:16 PT
....It will pass!...
...I'm gettin' kinda tired of 4ds' despondent sardonic negativeness!..this thing is going to be passed by the voters of Nevada,,and it will give a well deserved slap in the face of the ondcp/dea buttheads who are wasting billions on this absurd drug war charade! will pass!

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #4 posted by dddd on September 08, 2002 at 00:25:58 PT way!...
...are you kidding?...there's no wat this thing will pass in Nevada!....the empire will see to it that votes,and voters are manipulated,and induced to make it so Question 9 does not pass!.......

..I say NO! wont make it!....dddd

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #3 posted by bbbb on September 08, 2002 at 00:22:21 PT
...4b...Online bookie!....
...So...just for fun.....I will donate ten bucks,($10.00),to,for every person who responds with a correct prediction to the question of whether or not the Nevada initiative ,Question 9,,will be approved by the voters of Nevada!.......this may seem like stupid,cheap,whimsical strangeness,,,but I am serious...

....[I have no connection with just think that they are good people,fighting for a good cause.The only assurance you have,that I will actually donate the ten bucks for each correct prediction,,is my word!.]

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #2 posted by FoM on September 07, 2002 at 22:23:49 PT
I don't think it will have much to do with the upcoming elections. The Initiatives will go on with little input from those running in elections. It's a hot potato. They always coordinate raids during times of high tension in the country. Seeing that we have the anniversary of 9-11 coming up the news will be flooded with all about what happened. I'm sorry for those who lost loved ones. I feel very bad but to turn it into an event of some sort will cause more pain for those who have suffered a loss. I don't know how much they will push going to war with Iraq but they need to get heat off things here like scandals in the stock market. It really boil down to the media. Will the media do anything about it? The regular news like CNN, MSNBC and Fox are what most people watch for news so they need to give this fair air time but will they?

[ Post Comment ]
Comment #1 posted by karkulus on September 07, 2002 at 22:11:42 PT
I Wonder if ...
This is going to be a "Matter of Principle" ,at all in the up-coming elections? Will it even be mentioned? I've heard the ONDCP say "There's a few people for it (the WOD ),and a few against it ,but most just don't care. " This was said to Kevin Zeese on C-span a while back during debate on the morning show.What's it gonna take??

[ Post Comment ]

  Post Comment
Name:        Password:


Comment:   [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]

Link URL:
Link Title:

Return to Main Menu

So everyone may enjoy this service and to keep it running, here are some guidelines: NO spamming, NO commercial advertising, NO flamming, NO illegal activity, and NO sexually explicit materials. Lastly, we reserve the right to remove any message for any reason!

This web page and related elements are for informative purposes only and thus the use of any of this information is at your risk! We do not own nor are responsible for visitor comments. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 and The Berne Convention on Literary and Artistic Works, Article 10, news clippings on this site are made available without profit for research and educational purposes. Any trademarks, trade names, service marks, or service names used on this site are the property of their respective owners. Page updated on September 07, 2002 at 21:44:03